The 1LE suspension is rather stiff (not harsh...just stiff)...what if the new Mustang offered a cushy ride on the regular GT model and that won a lot of people over who were only looking for a V8...or looks?

Yeah, these mechanical High-Pressure Fuel Pumps are a PITA. Too big and they flow too much fuel at idle and low RPMs. Too small and they don't flow enough at the high RPMs. It would be nice if they had two, one that had a valve that didn't open to the fuel rails until the RPMs were above 4000, otherwise it just recirculates the fuel. I think that would solve the problem for high HP demands.

Have you guys thought of using a rising rate fuel pressure regulator? We've been using them for years in FI imports.

You mentioned wanting to be able to inject more fuel into the system aka the same way nitrous is done. We used to use sub-injectors that were RPM-reliant in FI cars in the 90s. These were nothing more than one or two fuel injectors that were tapped into the intake track and would only come on once a certain set RPM was hit. We got away from that when rising rate fuel regulators became more reliable in the early 2000s in conjunction with high-flow fuel pumps.

Have you guys thought of using a rising rate fuel pressure regulator? We've been using them for years in FI imports.

You mentioned wanting to be able to inject more fuel into the system aka the same way nitrous is done. We used to use sub-injectors that were RPM-reliant in FI cars in the 90s. These were nothing more than one or two fuel injectors that were tapped into the intake track and would only come on once a certain set RPM was hit. We got away from that when rising rate fuel regulators became more reliable in the early 2000s in conjunction with high-flow fuel pumps.

Just my 2 cents.

Good luck.

Very similar to what we are doing. When all else fails, go old school.

Have you guys thought of using a rising rate fuel pressure regulator? We've been using them for years in FI imports.

You mentioned wanting to be able to inject more fuel into the system aka the same way nitrous is done. We used to use sub-injectors that were RPM-reliant in FI cars in the 90s. These were nothing more than one or two fuel injectors that were tapped into the intake track and would only come on once a certain set RPM was hit. We got away from that when rising rate fuel regulators became more reliable in the early 2000s in conjunction with high-flow fuel pumps.

Just my 2 cents.

Good luck.

Wouldn't you have to direct the fuel flow almost into the back side of the intake valve? The closer the better?

The PDF tells you how it works and shows components that would be in a sub-injector kit.

The way things are now, the need for a sub-injector system have pretty much gone away with better injector, fuel pump and fuel management technology, BUT there's still a niche for this sort of system. Apparently, some people are still using them.

A rising rate fuel pressure regulator is the way to go if one is experiencing lean-out in the higher RPM band. Tuning it on a dyno is essential.

In regards to AFM, we have an 08 Impala w/3.9 v6 AFM. You set the DIC for instant fuel mileage & watch it change back & forth between 3 & 6 cyl mode. It changes back to 6 with the slightest of throttle pressure increase whether accelerating or a slight increase in grade. I don't see how you could experience a lack of performance at any time, just hit the throttle. Also the switch back & forth is almost imperceptable. The only way I can feel it is if I lean my head against the window glass. I would think a v8/v4 would be even smoother.

In regards to AFM, we have an 08 Impala w/3.9 v6 AFM. You set the DIC for instant fuel mileage & watch it change back & forth between 3 & 6 cyl mode. It changes back to 6 with the slightest of throttle pressure increase whether accelerating or a slight increase in grade. I don't see how you could experience a lack of performance at any time, just hit the throttle. Also the switch back & forth is almost imperceptable. The only way I can feel it is if I lean my head against the window glass. I would think a v8/v4 would be even smoother.

...Good stuff....Yeah, I've never driven a car with AFM....(Doesn't seem to be very popular on these forums with the Camaros)....perhaps its not really a "performance" killer in the big scheme of things...

...But...my gosh...when I shopped for my '11, the L99s with AFM were rated at "1" mpg hwy mileage greater than the manual trans cars..."ONE!"...I could see AFM being the greatest thing since a pocket in a shirt if the mileage gains were vastly greater than those without AFM...

Just seems like a ton of technology and what-not for very little gain in mpg...on top of what is perceived as driving a "performance" car on four cylinders...dunno...

I was thinking, and this may sound dumb but the AFM on the L99 is controlled by oil pressure and load ratings into the ECM and blah blah blah but what if you could use a "line lock" system to keep it in 4cyl mode on the highway? I would think these cars could get 30-35mpg highway in 4cyl mode and that could help the CAFE and possibly keep from paying the dreadful gas guzzler tax..I mean really in 4cyl mode, it is a 3.1L 215hp motor I would assume that should be enough to keep the car going 75mph on the highway?

AFM on the 2014 stringray with have the option of turning on or off by the owner.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikes SS

I was thinking, and this may sound dumb but the AFM on the L99 is controlled by oil pressure and load ratings into the ECM and blah blah blah but what if you could use a "line lock" system to keep it in 4cyl mode on the highway? I would think these cars could get 30-35mpg highway in 4cyl mode and that could help the CAFE and possibly keep from paying the dreadful gas guzzler tax..I mean really in 4cyl mode, it is a 3.1L 215hp motor I would assume that should be enough to keep the car going 75mph on the highway?

Might be getting close to what you mention, if it's true about the 2014 Stingray having that option...No idea how it's actually done, or what mileage gains there would be, but sounds like a good idea...

I was thinking, and this may sound dumb but the AFM on the L99 is controlled by oil pressure and load ratings into the ECM and blah blah blah but what if you could use a "line lock" system to keep it in 4cyl mode on the highway? I would think these cars could get 30-35mpg highway in 4cyl mode and that could help the CAFE and possibly keep from paying the dreadful gas guzzler tax..I mean really in 4cyl mode, it is a 3.1L 215hp motor I would assume that should be enough to keep the car going 75mph on the highway?

May as well just join the group that hopes for an I-4 turbo Camaro. Not knocking it because I also drive a I-4 turbo car- the EVO VIII, and that thing is a rocket on rails, and I do firmly believe that an I-4 turbo-powered Camaro will be actually more fun that most think. Everybody keeps thinking of an engine from the 3rd Gen Camaro called the Iron Duke (2.4 liter?) and that's what this newer gen I-4 turbo Camaro would end up being like.

Anyway, what good is a V8 if it is locked in 4cyl mode most of its life?

May as well just join the group that hopes for an I-4 turbo Camaro. Not knocking it because I also drive a I-4 turbo car- the EVO VIII, and that thing is a rocket on rails, and I do firmly believe that an I-4 turbo-powered Camaro will be actually more fun that most think. Everybody keeps thinking of an engine from the 3rd Gen Camaro called the Iron Duke (2.4 liter?) and that's what this newer gen I-4 turbo Camaro would end up being like.

Anyway, what good is a V8 if it is locked in 4cyl mode most of its life?

Yu mean its bad to have your cake and eat it too? I'd love to be able to get 35mpg on my 2010 by it using 4 cyl and when I want to play with the power, I have it. I mean why burn fuel on a trip when you dont have to?

...Good stuff....Yeah, I've never driven a car with AFM....(Doesn't seem to be very popular on these forums with the Camaros)....perhaps its not really a "performance" killer in the big scheme of things...

...But...my gosh...when I shopped for my '11, the L99s with AFM were rated at "1" mpg hwy mileage greater than the manual trans cars..."ONE!"...I could see AFM being the greatest thing since a pocket in a shirt if the mileage gains were vastly greater than those without AFM...

Just seems like a ton of technology and what-not for very little gain in mpg...on top of what is perceived as driving a "performance" car on four cylinders...dunno...

I know back in the day, manual trans cars would get better mileage with the same motor. So maybe an Automatic LS3 would get 2-3 mpg less then a manual LS3 so the increase of 1 mpg over the ls3 manual may be 3-4mpg ls3 auto vs l99 auto... Make sense?

Quote:

Originally Posted by 90503

Might be getting close to what you mention, if it's true about the 2014 Stingray having that option...No idea how it's actually done, or what mileage gains there would be, but sounds like a good idea...

Now I understood the LT1 dod/afm on/off was turning on/off the ability for it to go into 4 cylinder mode.

example:
dod off (always V8)
dod on (just like L99 cars, the ability to go into 4 cylinder mode)